The EU: In, out, shake it all about.... (90 Viewers)

As of right now, how are thinking of voting? In or out

  • Remain

    Votes: 23 37.1%
  • Leave

    Votes: 35 56.5%
  • Undecided

    Votes: 3 4.8%
  • Not registered or not intention to vote

    Votes: 1 1.6%

  • Total voters
    62
  • Poll closed .

martcov

Well-Known Member
Exactly what? 34% would be a majority which is his point

Criminal if true. Merkel got around that at the last Bundestag election and people on here were taking that as a disaster and that Merkel had lost. Now, it would be enough to govern the UK when a right wing, or Labour party is polling similar figures. We need PR to respect at least some of the 66%‘s wishes in such cases.
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
In a general election?

Parties have had very comfortable majorities with a 35% of the vote in recent times - the last election was unique as the smaller parties votes collapsed

Labour would have 317 seats with 27% based on the latest polls
 
D

Deleted member 5849

Guest
Parties have had very comfortable majorities with a 35% of the vote in recent times - the last election was unique as the smaller parties votes collapsed

Labour would have 317 seats with 27% based on the latest polls
35% gave Labour a reasonably comfortable majority in 2005.
 
D

Deleted member 5849

Guest
Exactly 356 seats
It is, tbf, the failing of FPTP - it also set Labour up for almost inevitable defeat the next election, much as the massive majority in 2001 meant they'd have had to go some to lose in 2005.

But then... we've seen with the current charade, how 'coalition' gives dispraportionate weight to certain views over others too, so not sure PR solves the problem.
 

martcov

Well-Known Member
It is, tbf, the failing of FPTP - it also set Labour up for almost inevitable defeat the next election, much as the massive majority in 2001 meant they'd have had to go some to lose in 2005.

But then... we've seen with the current charade, how 'coalition' gives dispraportionate weight to certain views over others too, so not sure PR solves the problem.

It certainly does as it gives options of coalition partners. Germany could have had Lib, Green and CDU/CSU at the general election. The CDU wouldn’t give the FDP what they wanted, so they declined the coalition. CDU/CSU had the Option of SPD or a minority government. They took SPD and SPD voters got at least some parts of the manifesto through. Next time will probably be CDU/CSU and Greens as the Greens are growing throughout Germany. The Greens here are super pro EU. More chance of achieving their climate and environmental aims by working through the EU.

The CDU couldn’t have got their policies through with only around 32% of the vote. With the SPD more than 50% of voters „won“.
 
D

Deleted member 5849

Guest
It certainly does as it gives options of coalition partners. Germany could have had Lib, Green and CDU/CSU at the general election. The CDU wouldn’t give the FDP what they wanted, so they declined the coalition. CDU/CSU had the Option of SPD or a minority government. They took SPD and SPD voters got at least some parts of the manifesto through. Next time will probably be CDU/CSU and Greens as the Greens are growing throughout Germany. The Greens here are super pro EU. More chance of achieving their climate and environmental aims by working through the EU.

The CDU couldn’t have got their policies through with only around 32% of the vote. With the SPD more than 50% of voters „won“.
Or 0% won, as nobody got what they voted for.
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
Mysoginists, homophobes, empirists, facists, racists you can vote for them all in the brexit party whippey doo

You find all those catagories in labour members if you want - some who are in the inner circle
 

dutchman

Well-Known Member
Just found the data that you’re quoting and Labour took 40% of the votes. Where exactly is Dutchman getting his notion that the Brexit Party could form a government.
I'm not suggesting anything of the sort. I'm merely pointing out it has never been necessary to win a majority of the electorate in order to form a government.
 
Last edited:

Grendel

Well-Known Member

RegTheDonk

Well-Known Member
Ferage has declined the opportunity. Seems he wants election on rhetoric not substance.
lol "who is she?"
Bit dissapointing of Ferage that - after his bouts in the EU chamber, that would be light sparring session. I guess when you're the heavyweight, the contender has to prove themselves before getting in the ring.
 

skybluetony176

Well-Known Member
It is - no party would ever have to command 50% to win a majority

I never said they would. I’m disputing that 29-34% of votes would have won you a majority in every election in history. As per Dutchman’s claim. Two examples being 2010 & 17, something you confirmed yourself when you corrected one of my figures. When you look at the link I’ve just posted of electoral history of the last 100 years they aren’t even isolated cases.
 

skybluetony176

Well-Known Member
It's neither what I said not what I was suggesting. I was actually refering to the referendum result which remainers claim was not a 'majority' of the electorate.
You said and I quote you in full “According to every General Election result in history, it is.” in response to me saying that 29-34% isn’t a majority.

It’s pretty clear what you said.
 

bezzer

Well-Known Member
I got a Brexit Party leaflet through the door yesterday - a right pile of guff it was.

But they are the only people to have sent me a leaflet so far.

Out of interest, how did they know my name? Are they allowed to get that from the electoral register, even if I ask to go private on it?

My son received a leaflet from them yesterday. He's just turned 17 so can't even vote.
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
I never said they would. I’m disputing that 29-34% of votes would have won you a majority in every election in history. As per Dutchman’s claim. Two examples being 2010 & 17, something you confirmed yourself when you corrected one of my figures. When you look at the link I’ve just posted of electoral history of the last 100 years they aren’t even isolated cases.

You can’t count 100 years - the party make up now only started to happen in the 70’s
 

skybluetony176

Well-Known Member
And again my point was that it has never been necessary to win a majority of the electorate in order to form a government.

That’s your point now, it isn’t what you said initially. You’re changing your tune which is fine but don’t pretend that you didn’t say what you clearly said. Again “According to every General Election result in history, it is.”
 

dutchman

Well-Known Member
That’s your point now, it isn’t what you said initially. You’re changing your tune which is fine but don’t pretend that you didn’t say what you clearly said. Again “According to every General Election result in history, it is.”
I'm not changing anything, there has never been a general election where it was necessary to win a majority of the electorate.
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
That’s your point now, it isn’t what you said initially. You’re changing your tune which is fine but don’t pretend that you didn’t say what you clearly said. Again “According to every General Election result in history, it is.”

In modern times there’s hardly been any occasions where the leading party in the polls hasn’t been then the official government

If this was a general election the split of votes would make the leading party the winner in the commons by some distance as the voting is suggesting all parties will have very split votes
 

skybluetony176

Well-Known Member
You can’t count 100 years - the party make up now only started to happen in the 70’s

There’s not a single election from 1970 until now (13 GE’s in total) where 34% would have won you an election. The nearest would have been 2005 but he still would have needed at least another 1.2% and for his vote not to be concentrated to avoid a situation like 1974 where the Tories had the largest share of the votes but labour won the most seats.
 

Grendel

Well-Known Member
There’s not a single election from 1970 until now (13 GE’s in total) where 34% would have won you an election. The nearest would have been 2005 but he still would have needed at least another 1.2% and for his vote not to be concentrated to avoid a situation like 1974 where the Tories had the largest share of the votes but labour won the most seats.

Labour would have with 34% and the point still stands the party with that vote would be the government - given you seemed confused about this election being first past the post then it’s a bit rich to try and point score
 

skybluetony176

Well-Known Member
I'm not changing anything, there has never been a general election where it was necessary to win a majority of the electorate.

Again again. That’s not what you said. You said “According to every General Election result in history, it is.” it wouldn’t have won him any of the last 13 for starters.
 

Users who are viewing this thread

Top